The press doesn't have a conspiracy against John Edwards, but it sure seemed that way. I watched the news coverage starting with Iowa. Edwards had a 2nd place finish, and the press could hardly contain itself mentioning the "surprise win" for Obama, and the "disappointment" for Clinton.

I watched CNN for an hour. Edwards was mentioned exactly 5 times (including, admittedly, a 1 minute segment from his speech after the 2nd place finish), but I swear, Obama and Clinton mentions were off the charts. I couldn't even keep count, it was in the 200-300 range, every other word. It was on the tip of everyone's tongue.

In my view, it doesn't matter that they kept mentioning the "disappointment" for Clinton. It wasn't negative press. All press is positive press in primary season, because no press is actually covering the issues, anyway. The mere mention of Clinton had a positive effect for her campaign. By just mentioning her name, it made other voters in other states think the race was only about Obama vs. Clinton. After all, the pundits weren't even mentioning Edwards; they had to ask themselves, was he even running anymore?!

Some reporters even said outright, "without Iowa, Edwards is doomed."

The press had become so fascinated with gender and race, with how voters are opening up to a woman candidate and a black candidate, that John Edwards was completely left out of the discussion. It wasn't reverse racism. It was just a "press incantation", similar to the investing incantations Galbraith used to describe for our financial markets.

Then, once the initial primary dust in NH had settled, Edwards had no major wins. (Surprise, his numbers were lower in NH than Iowa after getting no press coverage...) So now the press decided its own prophecy was fulfilled: Edwards was already out, as they "predicted"! The voters, you see, they want "fresh ideas" and "real change". Never mind that the issues are never covered in the press. Never mind that Edwards is the one with the most progressive platform, and that his platform was merely copied by Obama and Hillary once they determined that some of the progressive ideas actually resonated in opinion polls.

No! The fresh ideas were coming from two wealthy elites, who grew up in middle-to-upper-class families. Oh yea, but one of them happens to be a woman and one who happens to be half-black! Isn't that fresh? Meanwhile, the white guy, with his expensive haircuts, hedge fund job, and big house, was just the "old guard" of the Democratic party. Never mind that his Dad was a blue collar worker and he paid his way through college, while Obama and Clinton took paid vacations to Ivy League schools! Oh yes, Obama and Clinton connect with the average American. That's why they majored in Political Science in college and spent all their lives in politics. To learn about real Americans.

The night of the democratic debates was when I just threw in my towel and knew the media was running roughshod over my candidate of choice. I watched that debate with four people in the room. One Clinton supporter, one Obama, me (Edwards) and one undecided.

At the end of the debate, we had informal votes: who appeared the strongest? Who debated the best? Who had the best ideas? Who was the most annoying?

Edwards was chosen by everyone around the room for all positive categories. People were split on whether Obama or Clinton was more annoying. Everyone was annoyed that they spent time name-slinging and bickering. One person in the room with me -- the undecided -- said, "Wow, I never knew that Edwards was this eloquent. Why don't we hear more about him?" Edwards won the debate, hands down, according to everyone in the room.

I'm not joking. I'm not making this up. But then the post-debate coverage came on, and pundits gave their scorecards. Who came out on top? Obama! Clinton!

The NYTimes cover article headline (and everyone else's) the next day was "Obama and Clinton debate heated". (Photo: Obama and Clinton, staring each other in a reserved match of the wits.) Read all about it! Obama. Clinton. Obama! Clinton!

Obama!! He stood his ground! Clinton! She showed us her strong side!!

Oh, and Edwards. He just sat on the sidelines. The quote that came up most for Edwards was, "Are there three people in this debate?" Edwards recognizing his own insignificance.

Most reporters didn't bother to include a quote from him. More often, reporters chose to mention Obama's little "black, woman ... and John" blunder. Obama recognizing Edwards' insignificance.

No, don't quote any of his policy that he eloquently relayed, or any of his defenses or attacks on his opponents. Instead, let's just write about how everyone recognizes how marginal he is as a candidate, including Edwards himself!

That was it. I knew Edwards was toast. If you beat your opponents at policy, presentation, and in a formal debate setting, and you still don't get any press time, then you are doomed. I knew he had to drop out eventually, the press incantations on Obama and Clinton were already so fierce and out of control.

That's fine though. I don't mind so much. I mean, Obama and Clinton are fine candidates, better than we've had in the past. But it just completely blows my mind how little our system resembles a democracy, the more I pay attention to it.